Now, 17 years later, I'm intrigued by how fear has been largely replaced
by anger. When we cast around looking for where the cuts are coming, we
look at where the government and its allies have been trying to whip
up scorn and rage: the CBC, the public service, generous pensions,
unions, provinces, (certain) foreigners, and pretty much anyone who is
seen to be standing in the way of Conservative dreams of prosperity.

The same scenario is being played out south of the border by Newt Gingrich. He gives voice to angry white men who like to think that they are undeprivileged. But its clear that the money which backs Gingrich does not come from Mom and Pop. The privileged -- particularly Sheldon Adelson -- are intent on keeping their privileges.

And so it is with Stephen Harper. He speaks for -- and whips up the anger of -- those who have benefited from the very policies which almost sent us over the cliff in 2008. When he speaks of "transformation," he speaks for more of the same -- the concentration of wealth and power in fewer and fewer hands. Anyone who opposes his vision is "an enemy of Canada."

It's strange that the man who claims he is the friend of the private sector and who last held a private sector job as a teenager -- which he obtained by relying on his father's connections -- should resort to a strategy which would never work in the private sector. Delacourt writes:

It's interesting -- this is something that probably couldn't work in the
private sector. (And probably shouldn't.) When downsizing cuts are made
in this realm, our bosses have to go to some lengths to prove that the
job losses weren't the result of a grudge or personal antipathy. Funny
how when it comes to government, or at least this government, we simply
assume that those being cut are going to get cut down first in the eyes
of the public.

Harper, like Gingrich, is a demagogue. Bob Rae is right. They deserve each other.

Is there a generational difference here? Hatred of unions, boomers, and many other things abounds, perhaps catering to a sense of frustrated entitlement. Whatever it is, politicians are using it, whether or not they have created it.

About Me

A retired English teacher, I now write about public policy and, occasionally, personal experience. I leave it to the reader to determine if I practice what I preached to my students for thirty-two years.